Today is 'Life Chain Sunday" when thousands of pro-lifers across the country bear peaceful witness against abortion by forming human chains and carrying posters. Pro-Choice is not at all a consistent political philosophy, most of the choicers seem to be pro-choice only about abortion. This is not a novel observation, George Will once wrote a column about how the pro-aborts are never for your right to smoke a cigarette or own an SUV or carry a gun for your self-preservation or, to update this, to eat french fries that have been dipped in trans fatty acids. In fact most of the time they are Big Government all the way and so I propose that we use the term "pro-abortion" instead. If they were really pro-choice on all these other issues I'd go with it but they haven't earned the moniker in my book. What about the choice of a woman to carry a gun to protect herself, a woman who may be in real danger and has been properly trained in its use? You'll never hear a Democrat talk like this, instead they want to protect the woman from the risque joke in the workplace.
The prevalent legal view that the fetus has the moral status of Hamburger Helper is the imposition of somebody's else's view of things, it is not by any stretch of the imagination a non-view as Mario Cuomo would have us believe and so I would also propose that you have to demonstrate the fetus's non-humanity before you can kill it which of course the pro-aborts cannot do. Also, how does it make sense that the fetus may be fully human at the 5th month or the 6th or the 7th but not two or three days before these whimsical and purely arbitrary cutoff dates? This is masturbation of the mind big-time and that is my thought for this Pro-Life Sunday. On the Right
EXCELLENT questions, z-man. Really, no pro-abort can answer them without trippping over themselves in hypocrisy.
ReplyDeleteYou know, while drinking a Carona last night and reading the surgeon general warning, I can't help but be bothered that the surgeon general worries about the unborn having birth defects, but doesn't give a hoot if the baby's mother sucks her unborn baby out of the womb.
ReplyDeleteAs for the general warning of the dangers of drinking alcohol, wouldn't it make more sense for the surgeon general to warn us about those fatty acids instead of outlawing it altogether??
I think warnings are the way to go Beth and if it's that important they can put big warning signs everywhere we go these days as long as they keep the decisions to us. Re second-hand smoke I think it's rude and impolite but, imho, it's never been scientifically proven it's caused all these deaths. We need better science and studies not propaganda from NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
ReplyDeleteAs someone who does get sick to my stomach (literally) from second hand smoke, I rather like the limits put on it. When someone's right to smoke infringes on my right to breathe clean air, then we have a problem.
ReplyDeleteAnd thats why I give Kudos to any Major that bans smoking.
ReplyDeleteLike in New York, Mayor Bloomberg Sent a message to youth of NY that smoking is not healthy and it's a dangerous habit to get into.
Good for him. And anyone that thinks he is a Lib for that is just plain stupid
I agree totally with you Beth it's just that I have a problem with claiming actual deaths from second hand smoke when I don't think it's been proven yet. Bloomberg can make his case without resorting to propaganda. I myself smoke cigars but never around people I know would be offended. It's simple civility. Yo Alvin.
ReplyDeleteAs an afterthought I would think it would take an awful lot of sustained second-hand smoke day in and day out to do real damage and the overall issue for me is how far do we go in mandating, or legislating, civility or proper behavior. It's just that it never ends, yesterday it was the dirty joke in the workplace, then it was the cigarettes and now it's the trans fatty acids. Everyone seems to delight in proving z-man's slippery slope points.
ReplyDeleteBut the difference in outlawing fatty acids vs. banning smoking is that if someone else sits next to me eating greasy foods, that doesn't affect me, but sitting near a smoker does make me physically ill. It's not a matter of politeness but actual assault!
ReplyDeletePeople talking on cell phones all over the place is very annoying and impolite, but it doesn't hurt me (unless they are behind the wheel and that can be dangerous). Trying to ban something like talking on cell phones while in the grocery store, that would be intrusive just for the sake of polite.
I mean in a choice between someone's right to smoke vs. a my right to not be sick, I think it makes sense to give it to preventing health issues and let the smoker go elsewhere. I am not telling smokers to stop killing themselves slowly, just not around me or my asthmatic child.
And getting back to the pro-life issue, I think abortion is wrong because it is also a health issue, for the unborn child! And how do you say that the mother's right to not want to be pregnant superceeds the child's right to live? When someone else's health is harmed (and I think killing the unborn baby qualifies as unhealthy for him or her) then I am sorry but life should be the paramount right here.
ReplyDeleteI really have no problem Beth with restaurants having designated smoking and non-smoking areas or no-smoking zones at work. Someone told me they can take your kid away from you if you smoke in his presence. While not a good thing to do on the parent's part I think this is government overreaching.
ReplyDeleteYou make some excellent distinctions Beth between laws banning smoking in public and trans fatty acids and cell phones. You seem very aware of the slippery slope which is good but Bloomberg is just tobogganing down the slopes right now and doesn't seem to give a crap which is funny coming from someone who calls himself PRO-CHOICE.
Look my friends it has been proven that breathing secondhand-smoke causes morbidity and mortality from cancer, heart disease, and respiratory disease, as well as acute sensory irritation. It causes the premature death of hundreds of thousands of nonsmokers worldwide. Smoke-free buildings are the only remedy. Secondhand smoke cannot be controlled by ventilation, air cleaning, or spatial separation of smokers from nonsmokers. I give nothing but praise to anyone that tries to prevent these premature means of death and sickness to our citizens. This is not a case of “Big brother”
ReplyDeleteAnd on a personal note. I for one would not go near anyone that is smoking in a restaurant or a bar. So I give Kudos to the Mayor and the Governor of New York for their fine work.
And on another note: You have a really fine blogg here.
Right you are Beth about pro-life. Life should trump choice and not the other way around. I'm always complaining about all the new laws being passed all the time but whatever happened to Terri's Law that the Congress was supposed to pass, something along the lines of don't starve and dehydrate someone to death who has not expressed specific written directives regarding this. Now there's a real law I can get behind.
ReplyDeleteThanks Alvin for liking my blog.
ReplyDeleteI used to work with this Albanian guy and he says in Albania they smoke all natural cigarettes without all the addictive chemicals. That's all good and something for smokers to consider but we still shouldn't blow it in people's faces.
On a sidenote I worked with this real sexy woman once who blew her smoke in my direction. I was really turned on by it, it was like something out of a Humphrey Bogart movie, but that's just me.
I look forward to the day when we can stop writing about this subject. It's boring already,
ReplyDeleteThe answer is that no-smoking laws are being added city-by-city and maybe state-by-state, and soon hopefully the entire USA will have this law enforced.
The restaurant industry will deal with it and we can put all of this behind us once and for all.
There will always be controversial issues in the restaurant business, when this on is finally resolved . There will be a new one, like we are seeing now they are talking about prohibiting : cooking with artificial trans fatty acids.. So new there’s something else to talk about. But getting back to the non smoking issue. I think that the overwhelming majority of restaurant owners will be happy to see smoking go away. There are just too many problems associated with it. And how about all the research that suggest your business will actually improve when smoking is eliminated
Have to dissagree with you Alvin.
ReplyDeleteLook my friends it has been proven that breathing secondhand-smoke causes morbidity and mortality from cancer, heart disease, and respiratory disease, as well as acute sensory irritation. It causes the premature death of hundreds of thousands of nonsmokers worldwide. Smoke-free buildings are the only remedy. Secondhand smoke cannot be controlled by ventilation, air cleaning, or spatial separation of smokers from nonsmokers. I give nothing but praise to anyone that tries to prevent these premature means of death and sickness to our citizens. This is not a case of “Big brother”
I am a smoker - not for much longer but there it is. I am all for banning smoking anywhere near public buildings or any buildings that a person really has little choice to go into - hospitals come to mind. But when it comes to telling a person what they can allow or not, in their own store, resteraunt or bar - you go way to far. You, as non-smokers, have no reason to frequent places that allow smoking, if you do not wish. No one is forcing you to go into them.
And for the record, I am pro-choice. I also believe in a persons right to choose to carry a firearm, as long as they are well trained - every state that allows conceal andcarry permits requires those getting those permits to be so trained and I am ok with that as that makes everyone else around them safer. I believe that if you are stupid enough to eat trans-fats, go ahead and do so. And if you wish to drive a monsterous gas guzzler, continue to facilitate our dependence on oil from natrions that support terror - I will mock you, I will get in your face about it - but I would fight any legislation to restrict that right. And while I am not a democrat, I do feel it is anyones right not to be harassed in the workplace, whether it involve sex, religion, race, sexual preference or simply personal foibles. I do think this gets taken way to far in many cases but the ability to be secure in ones job as long as they do their job as reasonably expected is paramount adn should not be contingent on what kind of jerk the boss or co-workers might be.
To be clear. I find abortion repugnant. I am for going to lengths to eradicate abortion as birth control. There will likely, always be abortion for those who want a child but either find themselves put into seriously elevated risk to carry or those whose baby is missing organs necessary for it's survival outside the womb. But outside those perameters I would love to see those who engage in non-procreative sex, to be responsible enough to not get pregnent. Until then, I am going to support the right to choose. Quite honestly, I think it is a hell of a lot worse to bring that child into the world to be raised by someone who doesn't want a child. That is not an environment for a child to be raised in. I am all for requireing counciling, parental notification
One last "consistency" on my part. I also believe that forcing, even soemone who's brain is jello to die of dehydration or starvation is disgusting. If they have a living will or a partner who they have clearly expressed their wishes to, they should be given a fatal dose of sodium morphate and allowed to die with dignity and without pain.
DuWayne, you make very good sense but you have to admit that most pro-choice people do not see many of these issues the same way. I don't see them carrying signs about the right to carry a gun for instance on the steps of the Capitol.
ReplyDeleteOn a sidenote I worked with this real sexy woman once who blew her smoke in my direction. I was really turned on by it, it was like something out of a Humphrey Bogart movie, but that's just me.
ReplyDeleteWas she by chance European? Blowing smoke in ones face, in many European countries is a way to express your desire for a tryst. Personaly, I don't find it very stimulating, but I can understand it having that effect. My old boss back in Michigan had a Belgian family staying with them for a week (our shop was next to their house) and they had a 22 year old daughter who did that to one of the guys on my crew. Had she done it to me, I might have actually gotten turned on by it. It was the way she did it - there really wasn't any question what was on her mind when she did it. Of course, had she done it to me at the time, I would have been more embarresed than anything else - I was still with my son's mom at the time.
DD2 said -
ReplyDeleteAnd how about all the research that suggest your business will actually improve when smoking is eliminated
I'm certain the owners of bars in WA, who have lost between 40-60% of their business since the smoking ban was implemented, would feel a lot better after seeing that research.
I'm sorry, I am just not interested in the government being a nanny in our private lives. I am perfectly capable of deciding to frequent resteraunts that do not allow smoking. Even as a smoker, I did just that back in MI, because I am also a dad and do not like exposing my child to second hand smoke. Being a smoker, I would also like the option to frequent a smoker friendly resteraunt on rainy, nasty winter days (I live in Portland OR now), for lunch. No one is forced to frequent places that allow it - period. But in OR, for me to get lunch someplace I can smoke, means going to bars. I do want to smoke - I do not wish to be nauseated by the stench of alchoholic beverages while eating. But because of anti-smoking natzis, I have no choice. There are many resteraunts and bars that do not allow smoking, the market place demanded it. So why do you think you have a right to tell a business owner they cannot allow it, if they so desire?
DuWayne Brayton said...
ReplyDeleteI'm certain the owners of bars in WA, who have lost between 40-60% of their business since the smoking ban was implemented, would feel a lot better after seeing that research.
I say:
Well You call them non smoking Nazi’s, I don’t. What about NYer's right to go into a restaurant and NOT be subjected to that poison?
The theory about places going out of business is not at all true. There are more NON smokers today than smokers and in New York it has been proven that restaurants have increased their business since the NO smoking law. Do you really think that smokers are going to stop going to restaurants? No way!
If the Govt shows that people are getting sick from 2nd hand smoke and thet are. Then they should enforce laws like that.
I applaud any City official that has the guts to enforce such laws.
You say you are from WA. Well look at this..
1st quarter 2006 statewide total retail sales increased 10.3 percent
1st quarter 2006 statewide total bar and restaurant sales increased 7.9 percent
1st quarter 2006 Seattle total retail sales increased 12.4 percent
1st quarter 2006 Seattle total bar and restaurant sales increased 5.8 percent
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/blogs/dailyweekly/2006/08/smoking_ban_doesnt_pencil_out.php
Ok, time for my 2 cents..
ReplyDeleteA comprehensive review of 97 studies published before September 2002 on the economic effects of the smoke free policies on the hospitality industry found:[1]
Of the 35 studies on this topic published that found a negative impact, none were funded by a source clearly independent of the tobacco industry, and none both used objective measures and were peer reviewed.
· The 21 best designed studies found that smoke-free restaurant and bar laws had no negative impact on revenue or jobs.
New York
New York’s Smoke-Free Air Act came into effect on March 30, 2003. New York’s hospitality industry lobbied vigorously against the legislation, claiming that it would have a disastrous effect on bars and restaurants.
In March 2004, a report on the impact of the legislation was issued by the New York City Department of Finance, the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, the Department of Small Business Services, and the Economic Development Corporation. It concluded that:
“One year later, the data are clear. . . Since the law went into effect, business receipts for restaurants and bars have increased, employment has risen, virtually all establishments are complying with the law, and the number of new liquor licenses issued has increased—all signs that New York City bars and restaurants are prospering.”
Key findings from the report were that:
Business tax receipts in restaurants and bars were up 8.7%;
Employment in restaurants and bars increased by 10,600 jobs (about 2,800 seasonally adjusted jobs);
97% of restaurants and bars were fully smoke-free;
New Yorkers overwhelmingly supported the law. [2]
The 2004 Zagat New York City Restaurant Survey of nearly 30,000 New York restaurant-goers found that 23 percent of respondents said they are eating out more often because of the city’s smoke-free workplace law, while only four percent said they are eating out less. Zagat’s press release concluded:
“The city’s recent smoking ban, far from curbing restaurant traffic, has given it a major lift.”
No more Cigar Salad
No more Pizza Nicotini
No more Creme Fumee
Maybe some of you smokers out there are offended I rejoice ... Just remember that for us, non-smokers, cigarette smoke at the dinner table is as enjoyable as a (smelly) fart in the face.
We’’ve had to put up with that for way too long. So I say to you poor nicotine freaks, Take it outside!
And what about all those who argue for businesses to be held accountable for polluting the air, and want the government to regulate that and yet they don't want to be told where they can and can't smoke?
ReplyDeleteI do want to smoke - I do not wish to be nauseated by the stench of alchoholic beverages while eating.
ReplyDeleteSo, DuWayne you can understand why I don't like the stench of cigarette smoke then, can't you? Except after being around smoke, it gets into your hair and clothing even after you leave but you won't smell of alcohol (unless you consume it) after you leave a bar.
If you don't wish to be around smoke, then go to one of the myriad bars or reseraunts that do not allow it. It is really that simple. No one holds a gun to your head and says, "go in here and eat or drink." Factor the allowance of smoking into your descision to give an establishment your business. But making laws that restrict a business owners right to allow smoking is just nuts.
ReplyDelete1st quarter 2006 statewide total bar and restaurant sales increased 7.9 percent
I am sure that is comforting to those bars that don't survive. And for months after the ban went into effect, they made the news on a weekly basis. I live in Portland, right across the Columbia river from Washington, so our local news in mixed with that of Vancouver Washington. I am more against the smoking ban for resteraunts here because very few would allow smoking if it were legal. But there is no reason to ban it in bars. The majority of bars in Portland don't allow smoking anyways, it isn't hard to find a smoke free bar - why should we have a blanket ban? The marketplace is already doing it for you.
I realise a lot of smokers are ridiculously obnoxious about it. I am not one of them. Most smokers aren't. I go well out of my way to avoid sharing my smoke - I don't think I have a right to polute those who choose not to do what I do. I smoke outside nearly all the time. There is no smoking inside at my home, nor do any of my freinds allow it inside their homes - though many of them smoke. I prefer going to non-smoking places - I hate being closed in with tobacco smoke. Very rarely, do I ever go into a bar, only on time in the last year have I gone to a bar. I have also only been to the tobacco shop/coffee shop that got a liquor license so that it could allow smoking, even though they don't serve alchohol, once, since I moved out here. This really doesn't effect me at all. It is purely a matter of principle.
DuWayne Brayton said...I realise a lot of smokers are ridiculously obnoxious
ReplyDeleteI say:.....
I'm glad you do, because they are! And you can add, ridiculously careless and thoughtless...but spare me the lose of business routine, because thats so lame. It takes balls to stand up against the righteous-smokers-til-we-die-from-cancer-crowd.. So I give these Mayors a lot of credit.
.but spare me the lose of business routine, because thats so lame.
ReplyDeleteYes, especialy lame to the person who invested themselves into opening and running a bar, wholkost 60% or more of there business after the smoking ban takes effect and had to close. Again, what is so hard about going to a bar or resteraunt that already prohibits smoking?
And to think I have been getting upset with liberals for pushing these smoking bans. The last place I would figure to see a bunch of conservatives, would be in a thread, defending an egregious regulation of businesses. I capitulate - it is so worth it to see self professed conservatives asking the government to "save" them from the smokers, instead fo letting the demands of the market do it for them. I always feel weird arguing against business regulations on principal - because as a liberal I do support regulation of business and even the economy. Please, do not misconstrue this as an inconsistancy on my part. Ultimately, I think it is important to let the market do it's job - and it is, in the case of smoking. My philosophy is, regulation is fine, but only when absolutely necessary. I prefer to see the market handle issues that arise, whenever possible. There are many issues that the market is unable to contain and when they arise - regulate them.
But in this case, just to have heard a number of conservatives screaming to regulate business - some into closing - wow, I give up. Just curious though, how many of you who are arguing for these smoking bans also support regulation of large corporations in the interest of public good? Or do you just like to regulate small businesses, that have no real lobbying power? Even though those businesses are the backbone of this country and it's economy.
Again I appeal to the whole issue of the health of innocent bystanders. I am not saying to ban smokers from smoking, see that would be the government overreaching its boundaries. But yes, I do support the government intervening on our behalf when any business big or small is doing things to the enviroment that makes it unhealthy, and that includes the indoor enviroment as well. Just as it hurts the bottom line for big businesses when they have to follow regulations that protect our health and environment so too should even small businesses be made to do what is right by ALL their customers and provide a clean environment in the establishments.
ReplyDeleteDuWayne Brayton said...
ReplyDeleteIf you don't wish to be around smoke, then go to one of the myriad bars or reseraunts that do not allow it. It is really that simple. No one holds a gun to your head and says, "go in here and eat or drink." Factor the allowance of smoking into your descision to give an establishment your business. But making laws that restrict a business owners right to allow smoking is just nuts.
I say:
But I don’t want to go to a myriad bar or restaurants that do not allow it.... I want to go to any restaurant or bar I want to.
Just because ONE somker may go into the restaurant of MY choice then i have ot go elsewhere. NO sir, let the smoker NUT jobs go out into the street and smoke.
A restaurants is for the masses, not for one group of Addicts.
And another thing. People often link smoking to lung cancer, but what about other more common diseases that smoker's are more vulnerable too -- such as pneumonia or bronchitis or other respiratory infection. So to say it is not a public problem is ignorant.. Why do I and my family and friends have to be subjected to this harmful and disgusting thing when we take care of our selves. Let these Smoking freaks infect their own families, not mine
DD2 -
ReplyDeleteDo you go into resteraunts that play obnoxious music you don't like? Should they be required to change it because you want ot go there but don't like the music? Do you go to resteraunts with food you don't like? Again, should they have to change the menu to suit your tastes? Why do you expect a resteraunt or bar to capitualate, to what you and you alone, among their potential customers wish - vs what the customers already supporting that business, or the owner of that business wish? Do you really think you have a right to expect every resteraunt and bar to capitulate to your desires? Because if you do, you are in for a rude awakening.
When you choose to support a business by giving them yor custom, you are indicating that you like and appreciate what they do, especialy if you go there more than once. You can also offer your opinion of that establishment about things you don't like, or even things you really like. But you cannot force a business to do anything that you want - except to dissallow smoking if you can get such bans passed in your neighborhood.
But hey, go ahead. Just don't piss and whine at me about regulations for big business. Don't cry about the environmental lobby that is trying to allow us all to breathe clean air and drink clean water. Don't whine about worker safety laws or the minimum wage laws. And, please, don't ever try to claim you're a "free market" capitolist. Not that I object to not being such, I am a mixed market, mixed economy liberal myself, you'd be in pretty good company with your socialist idealism.
Peace. . .
DuWayne Brayton said... Do you go into resteraunts that play obnoxious music you don't like? Should they be required to change it because you want ot go there but don't like the music?
ReplyDeleteI say...How irreverent can you get?
How off topic can you get to compare Smoking with bad music.
OK, Get it off your chest, you'll feel better. I think with this reply we have exhausted the subject. LOL
I sincerely hope you enjoy smoking and everything else that goes with it. I wish you luck..
And I would suggest that you learn how to debate a subject without your FREAKEN, STUPID, JUVENILE NAME CALLING .. It only show how little you really know when you can call someone like me a socialist.
ReplyDeleteI suggest you post on the Air America Website. You will find the people there more to your liking
When I go into a restaurant, sit in a non-smoking section, and I see people smoking , ignoring the sign. I also want to tell them( I think you guys all know this ), that 2nd hand smoking ( inhaling the smoke ), is actually worse than the smoker himself smoking it. In Houston, the mayor has already gotten smoking banned in restaurants. Well, you know my vent, I hate it when people smoke and don't care if you get 2nd hand smoke or not. I can't stand the smell. I know I can't just cover my nose (One of my friends got beat up for that.) I think smoking should be banned, even though I know that, that would not happen
ReplyDeleteI hate smokers too ... i hate that smoke smell very much ... even i scold my father if he smokes in front of me ... second hand smoke is bad for health ... even worse than smoker themselves ... so i strongly wished that everyone smoker will stop smoking
I get mad when somebody smoke near me, I remember when I was riding a jeep with my 6 months old baby, one of the passengers smoke beside me and I asked him to stop because there is a young baby might near him, he get mad at me but I keep on telling him to stop until we almost fight inside the passenger jeep, see many are addicted to cigarettes. It's a pitty how dumb some people could be.
Bottom line is Smoking is bad for you, it’s bad for the people near you and I agree that it should not be allowed in places like restaurants.
It's better that people aren't smoking inside the restaurant
ReplyDeleteNow I couldn't care less if people want to smoke, let them kill themselves if they want to. I just don't want to smell it myself.
When I started school I had a roommate who was a non-smoker (those were the days when you could smoke in your room). I did smoke and we looked for a way to resolve the situation. I purchased an air purifier that literally sucked the smoke from my mouth into it.
My roommate never expressed one problem. He was happy I made the effort and even said, "because you bought that, I never smell like smoke even when you're doing it in the room. Thank you." There are ways to work out our differences folks. Why not try?
And seriously, if someone shouldn't be smoking some place and would be annoying me enough, believe me he'd stop. ;)
And before I spend more time on this hopeless issue I resort to that popular saying
out arguing on forums ... this is not going anywhere since smokers are never going to admit the health risk and the disturbance of second hand smoke.
So, DuWayne Brayton, I would suggest that if you want to express an opposing view, that you do so with reason, not with name calling. It only makes your argument thinner
Whoa is there a smoker here that is offended?
ReplyDeleteHeavens forbid we prevent you from polluting the air, killing yourself and killing other people with cancer causing fumes you dummy. Go ahead and commit suicide, but don’t take us with you!.
But you know what? I couldn't care less. Smoke all you damn want. When you're sitting there dying a slow, painful death from lung cancer or worse, just remember how proud you were to be a smoker and that you were one of the "liberal pussies" that tried tell us non-smokers off. Well good for you!
Honestly, you people are so disgustingly full of yourselves that it is no wonder you can't see the forest for the freekin trees. Keep smoking your crap and see where it takes you,
There is not much I can say that hasn't been said by the guys above me. But Duwyane, do I disagree to a degree. Just because someone smokes doesn't really make them a bad person. It just makes them stupid.
PS..I smell your breath from here.
And with all that was said, I'll finish my post with this..........I HATE SMOKERS!
While DuWayne has not addressed my comments regarding the whole issue of intervention in cases dealing with health vs. cases of things that just can be annoying (such as the topic about music played at a certain establishment which can be annoying yet isn't harmful to anyone's' health), I do not think he warrants an all out assault because he happens to smoke. He did mention that he will soon be quitting, and he also expressed that he does not expose his own child to his second hand smoke.
ReplyDeleteThere are smokers who are rude or who really just don't think or care about others, and because of them I like places that are smoke-free and I do avoid places that are not.
Smokers are dirty booring inconsiderate and increasingly like social pariahs. ... at least we are not as rude, inconsiderate and obnoctious
ReplyDeleteThey are rude and they only think of their rights! Well, how about MY rights?
I did not call anyone any names. I accused people here of supporting a very socialist principle, that being, a lack of faith in the market to control that which we don't like about a business. I was very specific about not calling anyone anything - that is not how I debate issues. I have not argued that smoking isn't unhealthy, for those who smoke or for those who are around it. I wouldn't make that argument because I would be wrong. All I have argued in this entire thread is that the market is taking care of the problem. That more and more resteraunts and bars are voluntarily choosing to disallow smoking and that legislating a ban is an infringment on the right of the owner of the business to run their business as they see fit. Just as you all have the right not to frequent that business.
ReplyDeleteAnd my point about the music or menu is relevant. You make choices about whether or not to give a business your custom based on these sorts of things. Why shouldn't you make the same descision based on whether they allow smoking. To choose rather to support laws that would take that choice away from the owner of a business, is, in fact a socialist ideal. That is not name calling, that is fact. At the least supporting such a ban is the antithesis of free-market capitolism. If I am mistaken in the notion that the majority here would not espouse some sort of belief in free market capitolism then what I have said shouldn't really be offensive.
DuWayne, if you are such a free market kind of guy, then why demand your government to regulate the big businesses from polluting the air and water? Why don't you just call for a boycott of XYZ Corp. because you know that they are polluting the environment? Why should XYZ Corp. be told by Uncle Sam to spend money to stop or minimize their pollution?
ReplyDeleteAnd you are a universal health care guy, too, right? So you want us non-smokers to let smokers not only smoke anywhere they want without government regulation (exposing customers AND employees in these businesses) and then you want the government to tax smokers and non-smokers alike to pay for the eventual ailments that smokers will endure after years of lighting up.
Do these really sound fair to you?
In Michigan where i live the Hospital Association has banned smoking anywhere on their properties throughout the State. I wonder why?
ReplyDeleteT think that ..every state should follow California's and New York’s example and banned smoking in all restaurants. I was in New York recently and It was great to not have to say "nonsmoking" to the hostess in the restaurants when asking for a table. Back home even if i sit in a non-smoking section, I still have to inhale the filthy smoke. from others..
And yes, the smokers ARE rude,' . ' They don't get out of people's way, they don’t care whose face they blow their poison into.
For an example..
One day this past Summer, it was 80-something degrees .just a Beautiful and Gorgeous. day.
So I go outside to eat my lunch, and am sitting, face turned up to sun, enjoying myself in the courtyard and thinking mellow thoughts about how beautiful it was there. ..... when suddenly 2 real nasty-ass smoker-young girls appear, and out of the ENTIRE WHOLE COURTYARD.... they have to sit down right! next! to me!! and begin to smoke.
This is unfathomable, as I was clearly NOT! smoking, and also clearly enjoying a moment of solitude. (WHILE NOT SMOKING.) You think they could at least have said, "hey, do you mind if we light up?" if it was so important to share the same space..
I don't understand how people can be so rude, when there's an entire rest of the courtyard for them to go sit in and pollute themselves.
One of them turns to the other and says, "dude, it's bee-YOOT-full out here today, idn't it?" (sic) , and all I can do is sit and seethe.
YES, it WAS "bee-YOOT-full"-- until someone decided to sit next to me with 4 lousy cigarettes between the two of them!! May they rot in an oxygen-less Hell forever. They knew damn well that they were bothering me, but they were enjoying seeing me pissed off.
I'd like to hear what they say about smoking when they get emphysema
Keep Your Butt to Yourself
ReplyDeleteI was driving along today when a lady in a tan minivan passed me. As she approached, she stuck her hand out the window and tossed a cigarette butt onto the street.
When most people complain about smokers, it is because of second-hand smoke. Three of the seven people in my family have asthma, and two more are questionable with the asthma–they have been known to wheeze on rare occasions. So yes, I am annoyed by cigarette smoke. Just being around it makes my nose clog up and my eyes burn. Many cigarette smokers are harming not just their own health, but the health of others as well–whether it is the woman who is seated nearby, or the young child riding along in the car and living in the house with a smoker.
But this butt thing–it drives me nuts! Could I just drive down the road and toss my used McDonald’s cup out the window? What about my used kleenex or my old bandaid? I don’t think so. Most people are not so rude–they typically keep their trash inside their own vehicle until they can dispose of it properly. So why do smokers think they have a special dispensation to litter our streets? I really don’t get it. Is it just that smokers are generally rude people who don’t care about others? I hate to classify a whole group of people in that way. But really–what is it about a butt that makes it okay to litter?
And don’t even get me started on the community college campus where I attend. Every day that I am there, a man is walking up and down the halls, polishing the floors. They are so clean and shiny, you could eat off of them. But step outside the door, and you are greeted by thousands of cigarette butts lining the walkway and stairway up to the building. One minute you are in a pristine environment, and the next you are stepping on someone’s trash, carelessly discarded, when there are trashcans right there.
So smokers, I’m asking you to PLEASE keep your butts to yourselves. Thank you.
Well this discussion got off the original topic of how most pro-choicers are typically not consistent.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't anyone think that people who think abortion is okay are extremely rude? I mean, they think its okay to disturb a new life forming in its mother's womb!
Although I certainly can see that you are very strongly concerned with the anti Abortion moment. I am not. I firmly believe in a women’s right to choose. But i am not here to argue or even discuss that matter.
ReplyDeleteI know there is no way in the world to change anyones mind about that issur.
But i am here to disuss the Smoking vs. nonSmoking issue. And I feel very strongly about smoking. I hate it I despise it and i will fight tooth and nail against it.
Significance, importance. There are many consequences in smoking.. To both the smoker and the people they surround.
does anyone hate smoking as much as i do?
ReplyDeleteI am lucky enough to live in New York .where they banned smoking in restaurants . And where we have a Governor and a Mayor that has the “balls” to put their money where their mouth is....so I can eat without smelling that crap and leave without smelling like a toilet.
Thank you Gov. Pataiki and Mayor Bloomberg.
To you folks that are not that lucky, keep fighting for it. Your day will come.
PS.. To Beth:
Sorry Beth I don’t wish to discuss the Abortion issue either. And I feel if the Republicans would get that issue off of their platform, they would do a whole lot better.
Well the joke goes that the Democrats will soon be outnumbered since they abort their own, while the Republicans will thrive since they promote life. Time will tell if that is just a joke or reality I guess.
ReplyDeleteI personally cannot see how people can be apathetic to unborn children being sucked out of their mother's wombs. But to each their own.
Beth, no one is saying that they are apathetic. But people have their own lives to live and we do so as we see fit.
ReplyDeleteDON't take to personally.
Just don't smoke is you are expecting.
Now lets get on with another issue.
This one has been beat to death
Beth, no one is saying that they are apathetic. But people have their own lives to live and we do so as we see fit.
ReplyDeleteDON'T take to personally. I know this is a very important issue to you. But it's not to me
Just don't smoke is you are expecting.
Now lets get on with another issue.
This one has been beat to death
You've probably heard that smoking and tobacco use can cause cancer and heart disease. That's true, but sometimes kids can't really think that far into the future to worry about an illness they might not get for 20 years. So let's talk about the problems that might affect kids more quickly:
ReplyDeleteSo if you smoke! Quit.
If you don't smoke! Don't start.
You want to know what the truth of the matter is? It's not my place to tell any other human being what they can or can't do with their body. Whether or not abortion is right or wrong isn't the issue for me - What's important is that we all have the right to make that decision for ourselves.
ReplyDeleteEggs are not Unborn Children, Sprem are not Unborn children, Eggs fertilized by Sperm are Unborn Children. At least that is my opinion and I will do my best to force that opinion on you and others through the legislative process. Just as people force laws on me that tell me I cannot murder people I do not like, and that I can't take a crap on the sidewalk, and that I must keep my lawn mowed, and that I must wear a seat belt for my own saftey, and that I must smoke outdoors here in California and that I must pay taxes to take care of the poor and unemployed.
this is the most contraversial topic I have seen. I think that it is great that everyone has taken their time to leave a comment. I respect everyones topics on this matter.
Mine is to let the women do whatever she feels she wants to.
As long as Abortion is not against the law.. so be it.
No offence Beth, I know your feelings on this topic is very strong, I've seen your posts on a few other forums and I know how strongly you feel about this issue, but I do not agree with you.
God bless controversy..
ReplyDeleteOne of the biggest controversies of this decade is the Smoking Laws and abortion.
Two topics that will never get resolved.
Oh well, thats what makes it all interesting.
I just fell into this thread..I seen it on the MLF site and gave it a try.
ReplyDeleteI have to say that most of these comments make a lot of sense, the one person that is in favor of smoking in public places seems to have a lot to learn about many things encluding how to win friends and influnce peple, however I would like to give my kudos to the auther of this site.
What Happens to Your Body if You Stop Smoking Right Now?
ReplyDeleteHealthbolt lists incentives to motivate those who won’t stop smoking “because all the benefits of quitting and all the dangers of continuing seem very far away.” If you stop smoking right now:
In 20 minutes your blood pressure will drop back down to normal.
In 8 hours the carbon monoxide (a toxic gas) levels in your blood stream will drop by half, and oxygen levels will return to normal.
In 48 hours your chance of having a heart attack will have decreased. All nicotine will have left your body. Your sense of taste and smell will return to a normal level.
In 72 hours your bronchial tubes will relax, and your energy levels will increase.
In 2 weeks your circulation will increase, and it will continue to improve for the next 10 weeks.
In three to nine months coughs, wheezing and breathing problems will dissipate as your lung capacity improves by 10%.
In 1 year your risk of having a heart attack will have dropped by half.
In 5 years your risk of having a stroke returns to thatof a non-smoker.
In 10 years your risk of lung cancer will have returned to that of a non-smoker.
In 15 years your risk of heart attack will have returned to that of a non-smoker.
If you don't stop? Well, just tell me where to send the flowere!
If you are looking for more information about flat rate locksmith Las Vegas check that right away. dankvapes
ReplyDelete